It was John Howard who cultivated Australia's cruelty towards asylum seekers, and it is he our current leaders are shamelessly trying to emulate, writes Clementine Ford.

Last Friday, I bought a kettle. It's one of those newfangled contraptions whose sleek design, multiple settings and eye-boggling price tag all cleverly combine to hide the fact that its primary function is to boil water. It sits in the corner of my kitchen, purring at me.

"I have a setting for 'Oolong'," it whispers. "I boast 'quiet boil technology'."

It is an entirely ostentatious appliance, but because I have the good fortune of living in a country where ostentatious appliances are the norm, I strolled into my local department store and bought it on sale nonetheless.

That same Friday, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stood before a press gathering and announced Australia's new policy on asylum seekers. For those trapped in a Royal Baby tornado, I'll summarise it for you: Australia, a country that clings desperately to the mythology of the 'fair go' and mateship, a country with one of the largest capitalist economies in the world, a country with a system of socialised healthcare and free education, will no longer provide refuge to asylum seekers who arrive by boat.

Instead, these vulnerable people will be sent to Papua New Guinea for processing and assessment. Should they be found to be 'genuine' refugees, they will be resettled in PNG, a country in which over two thirds of women experience violence, where gang rapes are not uncommon, where women continue to be burnt as witches, and where 37 per cent of its citizens are living below the poverty line.

It's difficult not to view Rudd's refugee policy as an attempt to court the bigoted voting blocs cultivated under John Howard's prime ministership. Nor does one need an advanced degree in Racist Politics 101 to recognise Abbott's response is a way of reassuring those same demographics that the Coalition is better equipped to 'deal with' the dangerous scourge of desperate people apparently besieging our borders.

It was under Howard that the selfishness currently on display in Australia was truly cultivated and nurtured, and it's to that festering wound that both major parties are rushing to represent.

During his 11-year reign, Howard was fond of invoking the idea of 'mateship' as a way of bonding white, patriarchal Australia. He famously tried (and failed) to have acknowledgement of it included in a preamble to the Constitution in the 1999 referendum. When a combined effort from rescue workers freed two trapped miners in Beaconsfield in 2006, Howard described their liberation as 'a colossal achievement of Australian mateship'.

Yet despite this apparent fascination with the dinky di Aussie values of a fair go for all, only five years earlier Howard had presided over the introduction of the Pacific Solution, "a series of policies which excised islands around Australia from the migration zone, turned boats back to Indonesia and processed asylum seekers in offshore detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru".

The Pacific Solution is often cited as a successful example of the Government showing tough leadership on tougher issues. Yet its legacy is far more sinister than that, and a direct contradiction of the mateship that its instigator apparently holds so dear.

Senthorun Raj, a Churchill Fellow conducting research into asylum seeker policy, told me, "The Pacific Solution was designed to deter asylum seekers on boats coming to Australia. While initially couched in humanitarian terms, the political debate soon descended into one focused on 'border protection' and turning the pressing human rights needs of refugees into a matter of orderly migration."

Howard's rallying of the xenophobic troops was effective and swift. And in the years since, the cultural narrative has shifted its focus away from the so-called generosity that defines the Australian spirit into one of miserly hoarding.

We live in a land of abundant resources and more than enough opportunities for all, yet so many of us behave as if we've done something to deserve this good fortune and as such have a right to dictate who gets to benefit from it.

We jealously guard invisible borders from the invading hordes we imagine are lining up to steal our bounty and justify such meanness by throwing around terms like 'queue jumpers', 'illegals' and 'economic migrants'.

We pretend that in a reverse scenario WE would show deference to authority and follow the bureaucratic protocol of 'lining up', even though it may take years and compound the danger presented to our families - because in our heart of hearts we don't believe such a situation will ever arise.

It is an enormous privilege to be able to ignore the suffering of people whose lives have been ravaged by war and oppression. It is an obscenity to accuse those same people of greed because we don't want to share.

And in the end, what was the result of Howard's Pacific Solution? According to Raj, "The policy did not 'stop the boats', people continued to seek asylum, and over a billion dollars was expended on a punitive detention program that just served to punish those who sought protection from persecution in Australia."

Much more money was wasted on similar mandatory detention programs, both on and offshore, even though the much more humane option of quicker processing and assimilation into the community has also been shown to be significantly cheaper.

And yet despite these facts, a Middle Australia curiously obsessed with the misleading rhetoric on its borders continues to applaud the punitive, barbaric handling of refugees, glad to have a Government that takes pride in declaring itself "tough on asylum seekers".

Take a moment to let that nauseating phrase roll around in your mouth. As former prime minister Malcolm Fraser wrote recently, "During my time in government, the Immigration Department proposed mandatory detention centres several times. We regarded the proposal as barbarous, and we rejected it. It's part of a policy of deterrence, trying to be nasty to people hoping that will stop them wanting to come. But what neither the government nor the opposition have understood is that no democratic Australia could ever impose penalties or hardships on refugees which could match the terror from which most of them flee."

This is the path Rudd and Abbott want to continue down - appeasing the ignorance of a population that has, in its refusal to show empathy for those fleeing oppressive regimes or war torn nations, ironically managed to paint itself as at risk from a destructive force. And for what? So we can protect the Australian way of life?

Resettling asylum seekers who come by boat to Australia won't result in people having to give up their houses, jobs and flat screen TVs in order to accommodate them. Being born in a country like Australia is a fortuitous accident, not a reward for work well done. Being asked to share your privilege isn't the same as being forced to give it up.

We live in a country where you can stroll into a department store and buy a kettle with five different boiling functions on it just so that you don't have to run the risk of burning your green tea leaves - I think we can manage extending a hand to some of the world's most vulnerable without threatening our core values.

Clementine Ford is a freelance writer, broadcaster and public speaker based in Melbourne. Follow her on Twitter @clementine_ford. View her full profile here.

Comments (131)

Luke:

26 Jul 2013 11:41:52am

At least the Coaltion have been consistant whether you like it or not.How many times has Rudd changed his opinion and policy on this issue?You vote for Abbott and you know what your going to get, vote for Rudd and who knows?

MJLC:

26 Jul 2013 11:43:11am

Taken separately, there is some raw content in this article with which I fully concur. However, strung together in the irrational and rhetorically overblown way that it is, I have to conclude that folk who can hear their kettles talking to them are probably not the best people to be musing on this matter in a public space.

Taking the glass-half-full approach, I guess as long as Ms Ford has got all her angst off her chest that's something I suppose.

Bob G:

26 Jul 2013 11:43:42am

A good piece of practiced journalism.Get off your high horse, charity begins at home.Fix the homeless problems, the under funded pensioners, the hospital deficiencies, the unemployment and the list goes on before taking on the rest of the world.Social Media and bleeding hearts have taken priority over these World issues.We should all want to get our own house (country) in order firstbefore we start sticking our noses in elsewhere.

John Coochey :

26 Jul 2013 11:43:53am

It is hard to fathom why this article was written other than to get a publication. It seems to assume that Australia has a moral if not legal obligation to give residency to anyone who reaches ours shores with a good story and how may once have lived in a war zone. There is no legal obligation for Australia to help any refugee at all other than being a signatory to UN conventions which it can withdraw from at any time it chooses. These treaties specifically refer to "direct" movement of refugees and impose on anyone claiming such status to make the claim through or from the first country of safe haven. There is no right to swan around the world looking for the best deal. A recent SBS pantomime featured a Somali who had come to Australia via Romania and then Germany and when Germany started to crack down on illegal immigrants he flew to Australia with forged papers and was granted residency. During the program he went back to his country of persecution (sic) to visit his rels, all hale and hearty including a one hundred year old grandmother. I thought he left in fear of persecution. All but about four people who have arrived by boat have come through or past numerous countries in which they would not have been persecuted to get to the land of prosperity and Centrelink. The furphy of whether they were signatories to UN conventions is just that. Afghanistan signed in 1975 and so has Somalia plus scores of other undesirable destinations which do not have problems with asylum shoppers.

Tom1:

26 Jul 2013 11:48:10am

The Author has correctly identified John Howard as the author of Australia's current problems concerning as he called them "Illegal arrivals"

Most LNP supporters are happy to lay the blame at the feet of Kevin Rudd, but they are defying the facts of history. Howard's actions were deliberately divisive, with appeal to the masses about boarder sovereignty and other nonsense. Had he sought some bipartisanship then the problem would not be so difficult now.

Kevin52:

26 Jul 2013 11:51:06am

What a ridiculous article.The author obviously has no real connection to reality.I am personally sick and tired of bleeding heart types like yourself telling people like myself that we are somehow cruel and/or insensitive toward illegal immigrants and opportunistic migrants, as well as the very few refugees that arrive in our country, literally by the boat load.Yes you can buy a kettle that does amazing things and you live in a great country.But it will not be such a great country if people like you get their way.This country, although large, cannot support a very large population as most of the Australian continent is arid.If our population is allowed to rise at the whim of people who want to come here to get a better life, pretty soon there wouldn't be a better life for any of us, living in overcrowded slum cities, short of basics such as a decent water supply, food and medical care.Luckily people such as yourself are in the minority.The current government is finally doing something about the problem of uncontrolled migration.If these people really are being persecuted, what is wrong with resettlement in PNG?Isn't that better than being persecuted?And if they don't make the journey, isn't that saving many people from drowning?Come on.Get real.

ray french:

26 Jul 2013 11:51:25am

We live in the country described by the author because of and not despite the government the Howard govt. Given the attitude that the borders be opened as she so wishes ,her children will find themselves living in the very type of country these people are escaping from. which are governed by their own brothers /fathers/ uncles etc who have no qualms in the way they are treated.

TSD:

Bilbo2:

26 Jul 2013 11:54:15am

It should be noted that the recent changes do not alter the number of refugees entering Australia, it only changes the mode of selection for entry. The need to close a legal loopholes that allowed well to do manipulators to self select for entry as as refugees via the dangerous and inefficient people smuggler route was clearly overdue. The ongoing rorting by those who chose to self select was eroding public support for the overall refugee program and also a cause of huge costs to taxpayers. Once whatever laws that are necessary are changed to ensure that the recent logical improvement to refugee selection are made the Australian taxpayers will be more supportive of the overall refugee program.

Dexter:

26 Jul 2013 11:57:37am

Fair enough if the author is willing to give up a little of her luxuries to be generous to people in search of a better life, but that doesn't mean that everyone has the same opinion nor the same desire to service our own moral superiority.

I'm all for Australia allowing in asylum seekers, however, this should be done via the official process at a sustainable rate that oversees integration and not by people forcing their way in via boats.

I am also wary that while Australia is lucky and wealthy today, this will not always be so. Especially if we are so welcoming that we are perceived as a place to go where life is easy and welfare is easy to come by. People will take advantage of this system and resources are not infinite.

Australia is a country of many different peoples, however, everyone here has to accept and embrace the Australian way of life. What I am wary of is those who seek to inflict their culture and way of life on Australians. This cannot be tolerated and nor do I believe the author's naive-pink-fluffy-cloud outlook can perceive this point.

penguin:

Noel Conway:

26 Jul 2013 11:59:18am

I certainly agree with this writers sentiments. This is a race to the bottom by two purported Christians. Where is their Christian ethic in this farrago of justice?

We as a nation are signatory to covenants that protect the right of persecuted others to seek refuge and asylum from that persecution. These people are not running away from traffic cops. They are making a hard and a desperate choice to leave behind everything they have known in the hope of escaping violence, rape, torture, and other barbarities.

Let us get one thing right. Australia settles refugees. We do this and have done this for some considerable time. These settled refugees have become assets of our diverse, multicultural nation. We should not think for a moment that refugees are endangering the Australian way of life. The asylum seekers who risk their lives at sea want to embrace our way of life. That is why they seek refuge here.

Refugees have the right to seek asylum, and we have a duty, a moral obligation, to treat them humanely. Rather than creating off shore processing centres, we ought to be building the type of infrastructure necessary to house these people in the short term. In the longer term they must be integrated into society, the faster the better. They can be processed whilst living and working in society. This is the humane, the Christian, option.

Our politicians, racing desperately to the bottom, ensure that hate is victorious over love. We can do better. Australia can open its virtual doors and not be afraid. We have a migration policy, we need to incorporate refugees as an aspect of that policy, essential to it. You don't close your doors to those in need. As a compassionate caring community you reach out a helping hand, and love your fellow wo/man.

muzz:

26 Jul 2013 12:01:18pm

Agreed Ms Ford.This is shameful business for a rich country whose leaders are racing to the bottom for the chance of a grab at more power.

This xenophobic attitude, ignorance and fear was started a long time before Howard took the reins and he manipulated it some more. They may deny this as they really believe this position even though it defies logic.

When the dust settles on this and the nation reforms into the humane place it was agreed that we all wanted, the current batch of leaders will hang their heads in shame. And all of us too as we count the wasted lives, withdraw the troops some more and wonder "could we have done this better?"Pity us the day we need help from a safe neighbour and it is refused.

EVAN:

26 Jul 2013 12:03:03pm

Another bleeding heart do gooder who thinks we can take in all the people who want to come here.Well we can'tAustralia is the land of the fair go we just don't like people who force themself on us.For every illegal imigrant that forces their way in there are 10 more deserving souls who sit in refugee camps around the world unable to to get placed because of these que jumpers but people like Ms Ford can't see that which both sides of politics now seem to recognise.

WayneA:

26 Jul 2013 12:04:00pm

This article is just another of those that give opinions while neglecting many actual facts..Those so called asylum seekers that come via people smugglers from Indonesia aren`t fleeing wars, they jetset into Indonesia country shopping, they live openly in Indonesia so aren`t in any danger, many have also admitted they have applied for refugee status and been rejected.Also claims that the number arriving illegally on our borders doesn`t have any affect on our lives or standard of living is a load of misleading rubbish, all those that leave detention are guaranteed free fully equipped accommodation , health and education plus welfare indefinitely all paid for by the taxpayers.They are given priority over many Australians that are on long waiting lists for subsidised housing, many are low income families, some living in cars.Billions of dollars are spent on those that arrive on our shores demanding we accept them, the money would be better used providing better services for Australians

Mike:

26 Jul 2013 12:04:53pm

"now your lost and gone forever, dreadful sorrow Clementine" as in the words of this song, you are really lost in your own ideas of how YOU would like things. In nature birds of a feather stick together, The hawk will not nest with the wren etc etc. Diferent bird species protect their territory for the future and well being of their own young, they do not allow maurauding flocks of foreign birds to take over their domain and eventually force them to conform to their ways. By doing this they protect their home. They do not care what casualties the other invading flock take in their endeavour to breach their invisable boundries, So let it be with Australia.

John of WA:

26 Jul 2013 12:06:56pm

Abbott's phoney 'operation' wont' work, except as a divisive PR stunt (ie. the polls were bad, I had to play the racist card early..). Instead, I propose a 5 Star, with all the assets of the ADF at his (it has to be a 'he' under an Abbott government) beck and call. Throw in every government agency he wants, aided by Haliburton on a lucrative, non KPI based, contract. In fact, bring in conscription for the unemployed and those on a disability pension and send them up to the northern reaches of the country. While they scan the horizon for the illegal hordes, those who are able can plant crops to feed the nation and trees to save the planet; the others can park their wheelchairs facing out to sea enjoying the majesty of the tropical sunset while serving their countrymen, semi automatics resting in their lap. The rest of us fully employed chappies and our women of calibre can stay at home behind our white picket fences breathing air free of that invisible substance and making babies, safe in the knowlege that the nanny bonus is just around the corner, where we certainly don't want those horrid reffos to be. And of course, we will all go to church on Sunday and give thanks for our new saviour.

Andrew McNicol:

26 Jul 2013 12:08:46pm

Go Clementine. You only forgot the bit about the hand we had in most of the wars that created the stream of refugees in the first place. Fraser seemed to understand that those fleeing Vietnam were doing so because we lost a war there. He felt beholden to them and treated them with compassion and respect. Mateship if you like.

Gigaboomer:

26 Jul 2013 12:08:52pm

Clementine, as a Christian I would like nothing more than to show these desperate people a loving hand, but to encourage this human trade is to condemn untold numbers of men, women and children to death at sea. How does that sit on your 'cruelty' scale?

Bighead1883:

26 Jul 2013 12:10:14pm

Clementine can you please define your last sentence." I think we can manage extending a hand to some of the world's most vulnerable without threatening our core values".We have so many who write a similar tone as yours or even in heavier tones,yet what is your proposal or solution?.Mine is that we have a referendum on asylum seekers,with the question being.Do we process all asylum seekers onshore YES/NO.Then the politicians are to do the peoples will.

John:

26 Jul 2013 12:11:35pm

Ok makes sense Clementine - Whats the upper number ? 40K, 50, 150K p.a or unlimited? At what point do you think our core values is threatened ? It all comes down to numbers isn't it?Does it have to be?

Our Governments doesn't matter left or right..increasingly are incapable of handling other critical social issues be it Employment, Education, Healthcare, Retirement. All you have to look at is ABC news... its the reporting one mess to another..

We just don't have confidence whether a Govt can handling large scale migration let alone stopping boat people and the deaths at sea. It is easy to seek higher moral grounds and look down the nose at the society which is what you are doing. Even I can do that.. what we need is real solutions. . There will be always push and pull factors. The pull factors will stop once we become like Indonesia with 240 Million people.

Erny48:

Ted:

26 Jul 2013 12:15:30pm

Thanks for this Clementine.Paranoia beats mateship any day in Australia.This "three star" general or whatever seems as farcical an idea as I've heard in the past three years of political tantrums and plumbing the ethical and moral depths.As the world fills with more and more people who knows what will eventuate?

Peter of Perth:

26 Jul 2013 12:16:05pm

What a load of lefty garbage. Howard 'cultivated Australia's cruelty towards asylum seekers'. Get over the fact Clementine that the Australia people have said repeatedly that we have no problems whatsoever with genuine refugees who do the right thing and patiently wait their turn in the various UN camps and take their chances on which country they end up in. And that's the system. However, apparently 80% of Australians demand that the invasion of our borders by economic migrants with the cash to pay criminals to bring them to Australia's back door, started by none other than the prize incompetent, Rudd, stop and stop now. Face it Clementine, if Rudd's brain snap was meant to work, why is the plan to continue increasing the numbers that will supposedly end up in PNG on full Australian welfare for life with no cap? The cost to Australia's revenue stream for this continuing madness is simply unsustainable and has to stop. As was announced today, Rudd has said that a major RAN ship, HMAS Choules is to be stationed alongside permanently as a floating hotel at Manus to house a thousand construction people building the camp. (Obviously Rudd has never seen the accommodation on an RAN ship) He is also to establish and 'air bridge' between Christmas Island and PNG to fly the ever growing numbers of illegals now arriving. Rudd's spending is totally out of control and he has no understanding or simply doesn't care about the damage he is doing. If Labor know that the majority of the illegals are economic, as they are saying, why doesn't Rudd simply announce that Australia will no longer accept any arrivals via people smuggler's boats? If Rudd was even half the 'diplomatic wonder' that he seems to think he is, why hasn't he flown himself to the UN and told them that we are no longer accepting these people and will fly arrivals immediately to any camp they nominate where they can be processed in line with those who don't have the cash to pay people smugglers and if that doesn't work, remove our signature from the convention and give boat arrivals the choice, indefinite detention or be flown home at Australia's expense. Sugar on tables is definitely NOT the way to go Clementine.

Noel Conway:

26 Jul 2013 12:16:29pm

The hysterical media, including the ABC, is fanning the fire of the refugee debate, much as it carried out the undermining of our first woman Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.

At a protest over Rudd's asylum seeker policy I mentioned to some Greens representatives that Julia Gillard would not have endorsed this plan, that it was a lurch to the right by a man intent on rescaling Labor in his own image. I was roundly criticised for this opinion, for the Greens want to blame the Party, rather than the man that determined this policy.

The Greens want to distance themselves from Labor, but they bear some of the responsibility for this policy, and for recent lives lost at sea. The Greens are in no way pure. Their intransigent position on asylum seekers prevented the Malaysia Solution from being effected, further undermining the Gillard leadership. The Greens could have forced an election by supporting a vote of no confidence in the Rudd leadership. Instead we have a situation where Rudd and Abbott are proving to be as bad as each other. Certainly they are both bad for this nation.

Norm:

Dave:

26 Jul 2013 12:18:39pm

"have a right to dictate who gets to benefit from it", well frankly yes and by that decision we have our best chance of preventing society from deteriorating, or are you happy with the government allowing into this country people that have amongst them rapists, vandals and killers, just because they came on a boat at their choosing and destroyed their identity papers. Having said this, the ALP have turned a blind eye to accepting vandals and rapists that have committed their crimes in the detention camps. Yes they talk tough but as shown by the people that blew their boat up and injured our sailors, the ALP accepted them as fit and proper people. Rudd is a liar and unfit for public service.

Sam:

26 Jul 2013 12:21:38pm

We can lend a hand to some of the world's most vulnerable without threatening our core values, which means we believe in a fair go and thus we do not support queue jumpers and should only accept those using proper channels.

Mr Darcy :

26 Jul 2013 12:23:41pm

Clementine I wholeheartedly agree with you that our leaders on both sides of the major party political divide have despicably used language aimed at appealing to redneck and racist sentiments. However whilst you extoll the virtues of humanity you do not address the issues that people coming by boat do endanger their lives and that there remain many thousands in refugee camps who also deserve our compassion. Also it is not within Australia's capacity to take all who would come. Like it or not there needs to be some control and process to ensure a quality of life for both ourselves and those we can help. Whether PNG or 3 star generals is the answer is another question but you cannot ignore the need for management and control - without it we just have chaos for all.

Stirrer:

26 Jul 2013 12:24:40pm

I agree with everything you said Clementine. I too resent our leaders' and media's pandering to the worst xenephobic elements in in our society and grt quite angry at the way vulnerable people as used as political footballs.However we cannot possbily manage to extend a hand to everyone of the world's vulnerable.I would urge everyone to listen to what Adm (retired) Chris Barrie had to say on Radio National this morning- to quote a few of his wise words.

"We shall soon have thousands of Syrians seeking refuge. We have a humanitarian refugee crisis around the world""What we are lacking, here and around the world is imagination on how to deal with it""Unless we create conditions at the source of the problem rather than at the end of the problem we are not going to change the stream of people wanting to come to Australia"And 'conditions are very different now to what they were in 2001. We now have a scale of humanitarian crisis the like fo which we did not have in 2001"

Decency and plain common sense demands that we deal with this complex problem in a calm. logical and as humane a manner as we possibly can.We should be screaming in the UN at policies like that over Syria which are adding to the problem and demanding international action to fix conditions at the source.What we do not need is more cruelty and Morrison hysterics.BTW- what will the rednecks do when 500 million affecting by climate change are on the move?

martel24:

Terry:

26 Jul 2013 12:25:30pm

Can anyone explain to me how wanting to accept Congolese, Somali and Burmese refugees is racist? Why is the wish to have an orderly migration policy cruel? Why was the Howard government's massive expansion of immigration from India and China xenophobic?

Ms Ford, like many "open border" enthusiasts, is very keen to throw around epithets, but on anything but a cursory examination her opinions are seen to be based on neither fact and logic.

As far as I can determine, she and her ilk will never be satisfied. Even if we set up Refugee Airlines ("We ask no questions! We need no papers!") with offices in every country in the world, handing out passports and citizenship papers with every flight, she would complain that we were not doing enough.

We provide permanent residency for more than 20,000 refugees per annum, on top of a massive immigration policy. The countries that are often lauded for taking more do not make the same investment. Holding someone in a camp for years while someone else pays the bills is easy. Especially when those refugees will never have the right to stay.

For a country of 20 million, we have managed to absorb scores of nationalities and cultures with fairly minimal social disruption. This has largely been because of a rational and agreed immigration policy, and a welcoming and generally tolerant society.

Why do so many Australians want to destroy this system and introduce a total lack of policy guaranteed to both shatter this social cohesion and actually encourage those who will spread real racism, real xenophobia and real cruelty?

Joel:

reaver:

26 Jul 2013 12:27:09pm

The article above is nothing more than one giant "It has to stop because I don't like it". It's entirely free of facts and even those things alleged to be facts don't stand up to scrutiny. Take this one- "According to Raj the policy did not 'stop the boats'" Let's ignore the emotions and look at the numbers. Boats in 1999- 86, boats in 2000- 51, boats in 2001- 43. The Pacific Solution was brought in at the end on 2001 to deal with a significant spike in arrivals. Boats in 2002- 1, boats in 2003- 1, boats in 2004- 1, boats in 2005- 4, boats in 2006- 6, boats in 2007- 5, boats in 2008- 7. During the spike boat arrivals averaged 60 per year. During the Pacific Solution the boats were functionally stopped with the boats averaging 3.5 boats per year for the term of the Pacific solution. We're now getting that number arriving daily. Look also at the total number of Irregular Maritime Arrivals. In the 1999 to 2001 period there were 12,176 IMAs. During the Pacific Solution, 2002 to 2008, there were 449 IMAs. Since Labor disassembled the Pacific Solution there have been almost 50,000 IMAs. Her other "evidence" is even shakier, particularly the story about her kettle. She spends 4 paragraphs in a 24 paragraph article using her new kettle as "evidence" that we can let in and resettle all comers. The entire article is the very definition of bootstrapping. Ford has stated that she doesn't like any policy that discourages asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat and has "supported" her opinion with the opinions of others who agree with her as if having others agree with her is a substitute for actual empirical evidence.

Lawrence of Bavaria :

26 Jul 2013 12:27:57pm

Clementine, thanks for a passionate article. I wasn't born in Australia. I came here by choice. Not because of the weather or a better job. I came here because I feel a deeper connection to this place and its people than to the country I was born into. I jumped through all the hoops that immigration held up and here I am. For 16 years now. Never to return.I wouldn't have dared to come here if I'd known that I'd be a drain on other Australians. Why should they be burdened with my lifestyle choice ? ?'m grateful that I was accepted to live here and through my line of work I've been able to repay that good fortune. Not just through taxes. My three boys are born here, they are proud Australians but appreciate that their parents have different backgrounds. I can understand why people from anywhere in the world would want to live here. What I can`t understand is that people bend over backwards to come here and isolate themselves from the broader Australian community. Their families follow and unfortunately often do the same. Many don't bother to learn English, they demand their religious and cultural sensitivities to be respected but don`t return the favour. Many come here for a better life - but too often only courtesy of Centrelink. Many come here, allegedly fleeing persecution, only to return to those countries they "had to flee" for extended holidays waving their brandnew Australian passports. Many boat arrivals obviously haven't fled in fear for their lives. Because instead of exhaling once they are in detention - fed, housed and finally safe - they protest, riot and burn their transit camps to freedom down. I could go on but these are just a few points why Australians are more and more cynical about boat arrivals. Many people who bypass countless safe countries, pay a mozza to people smugglers and then, when they are here, often turn their backs to their new home. Australia is a land of boundless possibilty. You can do whatever and be whatever you like. There are millions of success stories where refugees and immigrants just got on with it, fulfilled their dreams, excelled and repayed the country that gave them a second chance or a new start in spades. Those people will always be welcomed, but not those who want to take a generous country for a ride. To figure out who is who is another story.

Lucy:

26 Jul 2013 12:28:54pm

Thank you for an article that cuts through all the political rhetoric and really eloquently expresses how fundamentally warped this debate has become. This is not an issue that should be determined by a selfish fear of losing 'OUR jobs' and assumed privileges, it is a humanitarian decision about whether to nationally condemn other humans for their lot in life and deprive them from a future in this country.

Gareth:

26 Jul 2013 12:29:32pm

Interesting article, Clementine. It's axiomatic that one has to have sympathy with those poor people so desperate to flee countries torn by war and religious zealotry.

I fear, though, that your notion of 'extending a hand to some of the world's most vulnerable' perhaps lacks a little, ah, detailed programmable specificity. How many of these people would you, Clementine, propose allowing to take up residence in Australia? All of them? Nearly all of them? Some of them? Just a few? And would you implement some sort of screening? How, if you demurred at a carte blanche entry policy, would you propose treating the inevitable queue of aspiring immigrants in that case?

You see, it is easy to be a critic. The pollies, love 'em or hate 'em, actually have the job of making these decisions.

KK:

26 Jul 2013 12:30:56pm

Another of the increasingly shrill and demented rants from boat people advocates who have realised that no matter who in in government the Australian public are overwhelmingly sick of people smuggling and have demanded an end to it.

Only then will we have a truly fair and humane refugee system and be able to look after the most vulnerable.

Steeden:

gaznazdiak:

26 Jul 2013 12:34:19pm

When most asylum seekers pass through third party countries where they would be safe from the persecution some of them are undoubtedly fleeing, and the fact remains that not all of them are fleeing imminent danger but are looking for a better economy, it is patently ridiculous to blame Australia for their decision to risk their lives by paying tens of thousands of dollars to criminals to come here by boat when they could use that same money to start a new life in one of these other countries.

It is also patently obvious that the socialised healthcare, free education and generous welfare system that Clementine mentions that is the biggest goal that draws people here, otherwise more of them would settle in the closest safe haven.

kym smallco:

26 Jul 2013 12:36:00pm

abbotts like the boy who cries wolf, and the first boat here turns will end the cattle trade from australia then what mr abbott and could turn our navy into the cowards of the pacific if things go wrong out there, if this is what we use our navy and army men and women for then none of my family will ever join . , and will turn hundreds away from joining the navy in the future,i would hate to see the day when people boo our navy on anzac day .

Kazza:

26 Jul 2013 12:36:45pm

Aust is now the 'Ugly Country'. It's truly a race to the bottom to see which political party can be nastiest. Border Protection they say. Who is going to attack us? Drugs can come in by many means and so far none have been found on refugee's. How can we accept that women and children are kept behind barb wire? Think I'll vote Green's this election as the other parties aren't worth a tick on this issue. it's interesting that a month or so ago there were 30,000 refugee's that sort protection in Italy, none have been sent back and no newspaper called them illegal's. Italy's financial problems will be long term and their debt is about 120% of their GDP and they are more humane than we can be. Wonder if I can become Italian?

Gareth:

el-viejo:

26 Jul 2013 12:38:11pm

Clementine, by all means let's extend a hand. We have a long and proud tradition of that.

We are doing just that to 20,000 people a year, without any discrimination as to origin. Very generously too, for we bundle refugee protection with permanent residence. We are one of the very few countries which do this. 90% of the world's resettled refugees go to Australia, the USA and Canada, 8% to Europe, and 2% to other countries.

We resettle four times as many refugees as the whole mighty European Union combined. We resettle the staggering 75 times more per capita than the once mighty United Kingdom, who only resettle 750 people a year into a population of 62,7 million.

Could you please take a lead in proposing to how many people annually should our hand be extended, and what is to be done when that number is exceeded? Would you rather uncouple protection from resettlement, and establish refugee camps in Australia? Or just throw the border open to everyone who would want to live here?

This is a trifle more difficult than buying a fancy kettle on sale, isn't it?

Lehan Ramsay:

26 Jul 2013 12:42:53pm

Seriously, though. I'm part of "Middle Australia". This means that I'm common. I used to be "Lower Class" but we don't do "class" any more. I'm not Economy, I'm just not. So I suppose I must be just not on board.

"Middle Australians". How can you tell if you are a Middle Australian? Take a moment to feel the state of your shame, it's either a weird feeling in your stomach or a kind of heat on your cheekbones.

Do you feel shame? Do you feel a bit stupid, ignorant, uneducated, now that you have finished reading this article? Then that's definitely you.

Do you feel that Middle Australia is someone else? Then you are probably from Upper Australia.

You think you might be from Lower Australia? Then you don't get a mention. This might be worse.

Do you understand racism a little better now? That's how racism feels.

Ben:

26 Jul 2013 12:42:55pm

Meanwhile, you can be a communist, send your kid to Australia to study whatever at any university, basically buy your kid a degree, and buy him or her a house for the money you made through corruption and use of almost slave labour... and easily get Australian permanent residency for your kids. Not 3000, not 30000 a year made it this way... many many more. Simply disgusting.

Marko:

It was his despicable actions that stopped the boats and much reduced the the probability of refugee drowning.

It was this nasty man that raised the level of refugee intakes to then record levels once he had gained control of our borders.

It was this demon dressed as a man that listened to the groundswell of concern from the Australian public and took action. How dare he do this in a democtratic society.

And of course the people hated him so much that they re-elected him 3 times.

It must be tough on you Clementine to be one of the few moral thinkers in this country when the majority are obviously being misled and unable to form a coherent and rational decision on this matter. Yep, thank goodness you are here to remind the rest of us we are all just redneck racists and and should really keep our thoughts to our selves.

robert:

Demosthenes:

26 Jul 2013 12:51:58pm

Clementine,

I am still waiting for someone to explain why we can't just process these people in the community and let them in as part of an expanded refugeee intake, thereby saving billions of dollars and assisting Australia with willing workers and younger citizens in due course.

Has anyone else noticed the irony of someone wanting to come to Australia for economic reasons as somehow being wicked, being a position most avidly put by those advocates of unfettered free enterprise and the power of markets?

Rae Le Serve:

26 Jul 2013 12:52:16pm

I disagree with your comments, you miss the point and are misunderstanding of Australians who are opposed to refugees arriving in boats to this country. There would be very few Australians who are opposed to refugees arriving by the proper, SAFE channels, ie coming from United Nations refugee camps, particularly in Africa, where many have been waiting patiently for up to 20 years in dire conditions. These people in camps don't have a chance of being resettled in Australia because all the places available have been taken up by boat people, who do literally jump the queue.The most important issue at the moment is to stop refugees coming to this country by boat. Apart from putting other refugees to the back of the queue, it is unsafe to travel on boats and many people are drowning. Surely that fact alone is enough to encourage politicians to do something.

kevin madas brennan:

26 Jul 2013 12:53:19pm

yes john howards hate campaign worked wonders and scared the bigots no end ,and they fell for the scare hate campaign ,and now the LNP are using it with lies and they say they are Christian ,they are not as they want power and nothing will stand in the way except LABOR.

Happy Expat:

26 Jul 2013 12:53:19pm

Who on Earth is Clementine Ford that she is granted so much wasted space on the ABC WEB site?Her analogy of illegal boat people and her kettle is an insult to normal intelligence.She conveniently ignores the fact that these people, while not necessarily criminals backin their home country are criminals in our country just like native born Australians whobreak the law.These bleeding heart types are over exposed on the ABC in all its forms. Get a morebalanced collection of commentators. Space devoted to the likes of Ford would bebetter deployed by handing it over for more football articles.

damon:

26 Jul 2013 12:56:05pm

The 'world's most vulnerable' have managed to pay several thousand dollars to get on a boat. Last time I checked, you could fly around the world for that, arrive at Sydney airport, and seek asylum. If they flew into Indonesia, why didn't they fly out? Because, to get on a plane you need to have papers, that you cannot conveniently lose in mid-air.

Australia is not being harsh on the desperately poor, who wait patiently in refugee camps, it is being harsh on the fairly rich, who are callously subverting the system.

Ren Epogel:

Clementine, please spare us your sanctimonious crap. Kevin Rudd has delivered a brilliant master stroke. He has taken the wind out of the sails of the pathetic LNP led by Mr Pathetic in Tony Abbott.

Kevin Rudd is a genius. He has shown Abbott to be the over inflated powder puff liar that he truly is. I could not care less if Kevin or the Labor party actually believe in the policy, just to see the policy free vacuum called Abbott deflated was poetry in motion. In one swift action Abbott was left K.O.'ed on the canvass. Win, lose or draw bring it on. It is about time that someone had the temerity to stand up to this bigoted incompetent racist moron in Abbott. Kevin forever.

Tag:

26 Jul 2013 1:00:10pm

Well written, I would like to see this subject excised from our political debate ie forbidden.Apart from the damage it is doing to our collective soul, there are other issues that are also important but completely overshadowed by current debate.We need this taken to a non party political forum and one that the major players have agree to abide by their decision, one that has the best interest of the Australian people and asylum seekers in mind - there has to be a common ground.

Richard:

aelious:

26 Jul 2013 1:01:16pm

Excellent article..but the logic of which will most likely fall "upon deaf ears'...because the brains attached have been filled with fear, lies & xenophobia....if not out & out racism. As for emergency..yes we do face such..but it is not the delusional "invasion emergency" of the yellow or now muslim hordes that seems to inhabit the minds of Abbott & his ilk here & elsewhere but emergencies of: Climate crisis, energy crisis & poverty crisis..actual emergencies that will long term do more to downgrade Oz living standards & consumer goods accumulation obsessions of the average punter that a million boats....but issues that they either DENY or rarely if ever bother to ponder.As for the Abbott title "Operation Sovereign Borders."..well the name has to either be a joke on us or the delusions of deranged minds...but then Abbott's mind is filled with religious delusion as are those of many in politics. We are NOT at WAR with refugees...for whatever their motives & past assessment has shown 97% to be what they say they are ..people fleeing circumstances that you & I would also flee if we had they guts! Abbott's military supremo "solution" has been tried before & it FAILED. This is a civilian democracy where the elected political leaders decide policy & take the responsibility for in this case Border security.....what this Abbott "policy" shows is that Abbott is not PM material.And if this policy has been worked out by Morrison for years..why do the high brass of the military know zero about it???? As for Rudd's "solution" it is a insult to us all & to the people of PNG..as the UN has said it will breach our word to the rest of the world. But as I said what is all this to the; fearful, scared & ignorant masses called the Australian public?

ursus augustus:

26 Jul 2013 1:04:32pm

"We live in a country where you can stroll into a department store and buy a kettle with five different boiling functions on it just so that you don't have to run the risk of burning your green tea leaves". That's right Clementine, we live in a country of absurd oversupply of flam flam and bling where we never expect to have to make a tough decision ( What? ONLY FOUR boiling functions - what junk! Soooo 90's daahling, eh?) and suib doing so at every turn because how can we front up at the cafe with something unpleasant on our consciences. The simple and obvious answer is that people like you are simply piss weak, moralising, latte lappers. Tough decision? Just put it on the moral credit card, daaahhling.

rob1966:

26 Jul 2013 1:04:44pm

Rather convenient of Ford to ignore that mandatory detention was implement under a LABOR Government (Hawke/Keating), and that Australia's "White Immigration" Policy was also implemented under a LABOR Government.

It was the Fraser Liberal Government that finally removed the White Australia policy, and welcomed refugess into this country from SE Asia.

But then, it doesn't make the smear sound as good when you have to admit that Labor are as bad, if not worse, than the Liberals in this area.

GCS:

26 Jul 2013 1:05:28pm

Well done Clementine-sock it to them. I am absolutely fed up to the teeth with all the fear mongering and racing to the bottom this complex and seeminlg insoluble problem is causing.Sovereign borders emergency my foot. It IS a problem for us but nowhere near the scale of the chart Alan Kohler showed as last night.The chart which showed our level of household debt as being the highest in the world. And when did it get to that level?-when did it rise 300%. During the term of the last LNP Government. Now that the China bank is drying up for us the only security we really have is our over priced housing=that goes= we go- now that is really scary.But neither the Government-the Oppostion of MSM wants to talk about thatNo-they demonise a few poor souls trying to escape one form of deprivation or another while the whole damn world is sinking as a result of economic and climatic greed induced destruction.

And the punters think the current level of asylum seekers is a problem? Wait until mliions are escaping the effects of that destruction.So we are caught between a tweedle dee and a tweedle dumb.The sad thing is that if we deal with the injustices of the global financial system reduce the effects of climate change and end Western inspired (help Israel) conflicts we will have less asylum seekers.

Amanda:

26 Jul 2013 1:06:57pm

Just wish writers would stop trying to blame Aussies in some way.

You certainly are most fortunate to live in Australia. My father fought was shot and nearly died for this country for u and me to have that better life. I pay taxes to support Australia's poor. I limited my children to two only as that was all hubby and I could afford.

Do you have 7 children for your god and another 10 for you ? Most Australians have put a limit on children and only 2 or 3 is the 'NORM" else we would be just as poor and seeking Asylum in other countries too.

Therein lies the problem and rather than being Australia's responsibility it is those countries that need to address their responsibilities to their people in overpopulation. Some other counties pay NO or little tax so do not have to help their poor.

Seems the Trillions of Foreign Aid money the 'West' gives does nothing to stop the huge families. The more Aid money we send the more children born into extreme and unfair poverty - sold into slavery.

Now I ask you who's fault is that ?

Be proud Aussies, you pay taxes to help + care for your people, fought wars for our better way of life and given billions of dollars in Aid.

Other countries need to do the same i.e. help their own.

Some of these countries have more millionaires than we have people but leave helping their poor to someone else.

mik:

May Hem:

26 Jul 2013 1:09:03pm

Thank you Clementine, for your well-written and thoughtful article.

I believe our latest P.M. is simply seeking to get votes by his latest "solution" to those seeking asylum here. Rudd does not care whether the PNG project is declared illegal. By then, he will have called the election and, I'm sorry to say, have a chance to win it. He won't give a toss what happens to asylum seekers then.

Australia could help by withdrawing our invasion forces from Afghanistan and Iraq where we are helping to create more refugees. We could also stop imposing sanctions upon Iran for the same reasons.

Processing asylum seekers here on our shores would be much, much cheaper, quicker, more efficient and certainly more humane. This is the very least we can do, and it is all possible.

Karn Evill:

26 Jul 2013 1:09:50pm

I agree with you Ms Ford. However you and I seem to be in the minority these days. I live in a small town [30 000] on the NSW mid north coast. The people I work with would all rather see them drown. I have a few times come to defence of those poor souls only to be ostrisized by all. I imagine it's the same mentallity in western Sydney seeing as that is who these draconoian laws are being installed for, to appease the missinformed and ignorant. My biggest problem now is who the hell do I vote for?

C Ash:

26 Jul 2013 1:10:31pm

I was once quite pro boat people, now I am not so sure. There seems that more and more of them that wish to come here and in many middle eastern countries the situation for minorities is getting worse. My question to you, Clementine Ford, is this, if we opened our country to all who wished to come, how many do you think that would be, do you not think that we must have limits and the best way to do that is by controlling the borders?

rob1966:

26 Jul 2013 1:10:52pm

It annoys me that this author, like many others, paint the Political approaches to dealing with "boat people" as being some racist campaign, or indeed some attempt to curtail Australia's refugee intake.

That is far from the case! The refugee intake under Howard was the highest it had been for some time, and Labor have continued this (after an initial decrease).

The Political imperative, correctly so, is to discourage refigees from jumping on leaky boats and attempting to sail to Australia, putting their lives at risk in the process.

Rudd's change in policy, effectively encouraging boat arrivals, has resulted in over 1,100 people dying - OVER ELEVEN HUNDRED LIVES - and yet this author, and many like her, want to encourage more people to take this risky path into the country.

The hypocrisy in her position just astounds me! I wonder if she, and those like her, will accept responsibility for the deaths of refugees en route to Australia? I expect not - instead they will blame all and sundry instead of themselves.

Billy Bob Hall:

anicoL:

26 Jul 2013 1:15:38pm

The article overlooks the biggest problem with boat arrivals, they are drowning! this cannot be allowed to continue regardless of your belief of their legitimacy or not.This is a democracy and any policy decisions have to take into account the majorities view not a select few.I want the boats stopped not because i fear our borders are being invaded, i want them stopped so nobody drowns trying to get here.I believe PNG will be a deterrent and the refugee intake has been raised, what more do people want?

sleepykarly:

26 Jul 2013 1:16:06pm

What I resent more than anything else is that both Labor and Coalition want to spend $400,000 per capita to mentally destroy these people, so they will always be a burden on our welfare and public health system.

Why can't they just let them in on working permits so their taxes will pay their own way? There is a huge need for unskilled workers here in Australia! The jobs that no-one else wants to do, and would prefer to take the dole rather than accept them!

If any prove to be criminals or troublemakers then they can be deported as 'undesirable aliens', at minimal cost to us as a nation. I fail to see what the fuss is about.

din:

26 Jul 2013 1:16:24pm

""The Pacific Solution was designed to deter asylum seekers on boats coming to Australia"

Of course. And its the same with the PNG deal by Rudd, or the Malaysia deal by Gillard - threaten people that if you come to australian via a people smuggler, you will not get what you want, and you will end up in another country.

"Resettling asylum seekers who come by boat to Australia won't result in people having to give up their houses, jobs and flat screen TVs in order to accommodate them"

That may not always be true. When the immigration budget blows out, they need to cover the shortfall with money from somewhere else. These cuts can cost people jobs, or affect them in other ways where staff in the public service need to do more with less.

Now while every people who comes in via a people smuggler is one less refugee that we accept from a refugee camp, i expect its the costs that the taxpayers spend on these people that is the annoying bit.

ScottBE:

26 Jul 2013 1:16:26pm

Well said Clementine and thank you for speaking the words I often think. The present electoral climate is suffering from another Howard legacy from his "War On Drugs" - the idea that you can terrorise people out of their objective.

The Liberal Party (the Nationals have been silent these recent months) has taken Mr Howard's battle cry, as they have everything else he ever said or did, and moved to an even greater extreme. This is the psychology that makes conservative politics work - the attempt to fool people into thinking that Liberal policies will work because they are "Tough". Even Mr Abbott's rolling, he-man gait shouts loudly this image. Walk like a "Tough" - he wouldn't last 5 minutes among those who are truly tough.

Deterrence is an illusory concept. It is relative to the subject. If a person, as you beautifully put it Clementine, is in danger of losing their life or freedom, the threat of deterrence diminishes to nothing. People will escape tyranny for what they believe to be greener pastures. They want to feel safe and nothing is more dangerous than the immediate threat. Our threats are merely on paper - we don't aim a gun at them. Until Mssrs Abbott and Morrison launched their threat last night.

As for Mr Rudd; I believe that he is working toward a truly regional response aimed at establishing the until now rhetorical "Queue". I think we should wait and see what comes of his negotiations with Indonesia and ASEAN before we judge his plan. It is still unfolding. Yet he has established a more abhorrent system of "deterrence" than did Mr Howard. Not such a positive response yet hey. Not much proof that deterrence works is there?!

But today Clementine you have invited the ridiculous right to trash you and label you a Leftie, a Greenie and any other such insults as they can muster. I wish you well and thank you for speaking so eloquently with your conscience.

Get Real:

26 Jul 2013 1:22:43pm

Oh dear, where to start?

While it wold be wonderful if we could help all the needy people in the world, it is simply not possible without bankrupting ourselves and reducing Australia to the point where we could no longer help ourselves, let alone anyone else. And, we would still not be able to help them all.

If Clementine and her ilk want to sell all their kettles and other goods and reduce themselves to poverty so that 10? other needy people from other countries can live safely, in poverty with them. Go for it; it's a free country.

Here's the thing all the refugee advocates and socialist do not, and probably never will get. WE DO NOT HAVE UNLIMITED MONEY.

When one of them, just one, can come up with a number, a cost, and a plan for what to do when the number of people or cost is exceeded. I will listen.

Until then, stop bleeding all over me. It does nothing to change my mind or advance your cause.

Capn Blood:

I think most Australians are aware where boat people come from, and how they cycle of conflict has some bearing on refugee numbers.

I believe the list of things that Australians are not happy about in regards to refugees are as follows:

1. Leaving their home country for legitimate reasons and bypassing a good deal of other perfectly suitable countries to make their way halfway around the world to seemingly settle for good in Australia.

2. Taking advantage of a system of humanity by destroying ID documents, making inappropriate demands of their convenient 'rescuers' and clogging up the system at a great cost to the taxpayer. People would argue how humane our current system is, but it IS better than being shot at and dismembered in their current country, by everyone's mate, the Islamic nutjob.

3. Possible importation of said Islamic nutjobs. Apparently, there are more Australians in Syria fighting than in from other developed nation (search CNN for that one). That'll be nice when they come back to Australia further radicalised and trained in warfare.

4. At the moment it appears anyone can roll up on a piece of barely functioning flotsam, discard it as soon as the Navy appears, get looked after (better than at home, remember), and then get the full suite of legal protection and consideration of Australian society for a person who has been here for practically 5 minutes. If they dont get exactly what they want, suddenly, its time to riot. No worries mate, here's your piece of flotsam back and enjoy the swim home.

This is not racism or xenophobia. The boat people saga is a much more visible influx of people than folks arriving on planes and abusing their visas to overstay illegally. The boats are more visible and thus, this is where the public vent their anger.

And, at what number do we stop taking migrants in? Is there a magic number where our euro-centric culture gets further watered down for the sake of multiculturalism? Do we pick and choose nationalities so they don't have their own racial and sectarian flare ups in Melboure, Sydney or Adelaide?

I understand being humane and showing compassion is part of being a 'developed' nation, but that compassion is being abused by many people who do not share our sense of compassion and only view our soft touch to be an oppurtunity.

Close the door on these new arrivals and process the current lot. Then, take a managed approach to an influx of refugees, a plan. Our response must be measured, but it must be solid.

Clancy:

26 Jul 2013 1:26:31pm

Thank you Clementine. I used to think in terms ' queue jumpers', but the more I have read and thought about the circumstances refugees find themselves in and the more I have asked myself what I would do in the same situation, the more I have changed my mind.

I find it ironic that in other areas of life we are actively encouraged to save up and use our money to gain a private good rather than waiting for apublic provider - eg health, dentist, etc - and yet desperate people who come by boat are being castigated for doing the same thing. I also can't help wondering if the reaction would be different if these were predominantly Causasian people - say from UK - sadly I fear it would be.

How is it that we, a country who pride ourselves on 'generosity and a fair go' have got ourselves to here?

TrevorN:

26 Jul 2013 1:27:41pm

Great article Clem. Where did you get that kettle from and are they still on sale. I'd really like one like that for my kitchen. Pity that the refugees don't have electricity in their camps because I could have donated my old one to them.

chalkie:

26 Jul 2013 1:28:47pm

"We live in a land of abundant resources and more than enough opportunities for all, yet so many of us behave as if we've done something to deserve this good fortune and as such have a right to dictate who gets to benefit from it." Rubbish.

1. there ARE finite resources: the refugee debate is a proxy for a broader and growing antipathy towards migration (which is off limits to either party because of both the ethnic vote and big-business lobbying) and in a city (Brisbane) that has just paid billions for more roads, billions for new hospitals, billions for more wtaer capacity yet still geting croad congestion, poor health care and no more wter per capita I for one am tiring of paying lots just to get more, not better.

2. "deserve this good fortune": in many ways we are not responsible for our good fortune, but are custodians of the inheritance given to us, and that means being selective baout who is in AUstralia. WIth Afghan refugees having a 93% unemployment rate 5 years after settlement, we are required to limit the economic harm done to us by too many who offer too little. Talking about the past contribution of different migrant groups can't conceal the dimsal fact that our current asymum seeker is a drain not an asset.

3. dictate who gets to benefit from [wealth]": who else should do so? SOme UN committee? No place for some remnant national sovereignty to assert (weakly) a small lessening of the harm that tens of thousands of refugees (and the many more of their families brought in as subsequent family reunitees) will do to the social welfare that is rightly praised.

Petronious:

26 Jul 2013 1:32:11pm

So, we should let them all in and reduce our country to the level of those the "refugees" left. How jolly! We can all starve together in brotherly love. Get real woman, this is the real world. It's time to tell the UNHCR to go fix Iraq,Iran,and Afganistan instead of badmouthing Australia. If they did that there would not be a problem. Why should Australia be responsible for cleaning up the wreckage of others mess? Or Jordan for that matter. Fine words from the ivory tower.

Roy Morien:

26 Jul 2013 1:33:00pm

OK, so one scenario, supported by sad and tragic stories and pictures, is that Australia is being heartless and inhumane in the treatment of these people. Citing xenophobia and racism to support this scenario is not helpful, and probably is not even relevant. The fact is there is a potential population numbering in the thousands, of people wanting to escape their current social, political and economic circumstances. Can Australia accept this number of people? Especially when many of them are of a religious faith that seeks to overwhelm the social and religious values of the 'host' community. Would we be planting a social timebomb in our midst? What about the economic circumstances of these people? Would they arrive in Australia and immediately need to claim financial support? And also need significant social support, such as language education, housing, special schooling, social support and so on. Can Australia afford this, for an unknown number of refugees in the future?

But, the tragedy scenario is very real! There are hundreds of people dying in their attempts to get here. Can Australia afford to ignore this desparate scenario? Can we put the blame back on the refugees themselves for being stupid enough to put themselves in this dangerous situation? (or maybe desperate enough!).

But if we open the doors, how many people will pour in? Can this be sustained on any grounds; social, economic, demographic?

It seems to me that Australia is willing to spend, what, billions of dollars? to prevent them coming, so perhaps the economic argument is not valid. There still remains the social and religious arguments.

Then of course we have the 'fairness' argument. These 'illegal boat people' are seeking to gain an entry advantage over 'legitimate migrants'. I'm not too persuaded about this. Perhaps if Australia raised the immigration intake, like we did in the 50's and 60's when immigrants poured in from Europe, and we even heavily subsidised thousands, then the 'boat people' would just be able to join a fast moving queue. (But then, that immigration flood was from European, Christian countries. Could this really be what prevents us from opening our doors, hearts and wallets this time?

Oh dear! What I have written is rather confused, isn't it? But is this just because of my confused way of writing, or is it because the situation is monumentally confusing?

Sceptical Sam:

You, Clementine, and your propaganda piece are both wrong and irrelevant. As is your mate Raj.

Both of you are wrong to say that the Howard era policy on illegal boat people didn't work. It did work and if you and Raj were paying attention you would have seen that the boats stopped coming.

You are irrelevant because thinking Australians have worked out that the incompetent Rudd lay down like a cowardly dog and allowed Australia's border to be treated with contempt.

The Labor politicians have finally woken up and realize that they will be gone for a very long time if they don't change their approach. And a good thing too.

Ten years in Opposition and annihilation in the majority of their seats it what awaits them - and any political party - that permits Australia to be over-run by fraudsters without personal documentation. If they were truly refugees they would keep their papers so that they could prove their case.

The bleeding heart lefties and faux humanitarians - like you - who have the blood of 1,200 drownings on their hands are now irrelevant. Australia has woken up, at long last, to what you foolish people have done to this country.

Matt:

On the face of it:1. Refugees arriving by boat are settled in PNG2. We significantly increase the total number of refugees we accept each year3. We gain the ability to select where the refugees we take come from; hopefully this means that we take them from countries that are in a state of war and that we can rescue whole families instead of those the young men arriving by boat (not all are young men, but most)4. We extend further assistance to PNG to develop hospitals, education, etc and so PNG benefits as well

While refugees settled in PNG are likely to face some hardships, they should be less than that they would have faced at home.

Denby:

26 Jul 2013 1:36:49pm

Thank you Clementine for articulating the shame and nausea I feel at the savage turn this policy issue has taken in recent times.

We are all immigrants or children of immigrants. We have rules that define what a refugee is and most of the boat arrivals end up being assess as genuine refugees under those rules. It is cruel and exploitative to turn refugees into political pawns.

It started with Peter Reith's disgraceful refusal to admit the lies of the children overboard incident throughout the the 2001 election and the continuing policies of the Howard government which effectively recast refugees as thieves, scoundrels, murderers and terrorists. The none too subtle implied insults cast many as especially dangerous due to their Muslim faith.

Now Abbott has to outbid Rudd for nastiness by declaring a borders emergency and call out troops to defend the motherland. Get a grip Australia!

Zing:

26 Jul 2013 1:38:33pm

That's the problem with the hard-left. They never quite realise that they represent a slim minority, nor do they understand why their ideas are flawed. And when the mainstream politely ignores their "self-evident truths", they work themselves into such a lather.

An analogy would be a ticking timb bomb. The main parties say "we need to figure out how to disarm it". The hard-left say "Why?" and in doing so, they indicate that they have no useful part to play in the process.

The majority of people recognise boat people for what they are: An unwanted cost. And if the numbers continue to increase, they will eventually reach a level where their mere presence will qualify as a threat. So it's time to start thinking about what to do about the current situation and what we'll do when the breaking point is reached.

It falls to the main parties to formulate a practical solution. We can't count on the hard-left to come up with a solution, because their main goal appears to be about preventing one.

Peter:

26 Jul 2013 1:39:22pm

It is not John Howard, it is the majority of the population who do not want uninvited Muslims arriving.

Just how many billions do you think Australia should be spending to support the tens of thousands per month that would be arriving under your approach? Remember over 90% are still on welfare after 5 years so don't 'suggest that they make a "wonderful" contribution to our economy. The cost was $85 million in the last year of the Howard Government and this has risen to $2.8 billion currently. Glad you bought your expensive kettle now as major tax increases are coming if the ALP returns to power.

Simon:

26 Jul 2013 1:42:04pm

Again, your political correctness is sickening, as are your assumptions that you're standing on the high moral ground and that every person not in favour of the current ridiculous, utterly uncontrolled, utterly unsustainable situation is a dirty racist.

There are plenty of level-headed, non-racist people in this country who support multi-culturalism and an intake of refugees every year (preferably patiently-waiting refugees from UN camps who have no money to pay to people smugglers). I am one of them. And we are damned sick of people like you filthily smearing us and making out we're racist or so dumb we've been duped by exploitative politicians. It's disgusting how people like you believe in your own sanctity but instantly resort to the filthy smears and accusations of racisms or stupidity towards level-headed people who DARE to not to agree with your naive, pose-filled beliefs.

It's people like you who are the problem. You are kidding yourself if you believe even a majority of recent arrivals are genuine refugees rather than economic migrants with vastly exaggerated or completely fictitious claims of threats against safety. And you are creating a hideous and intolerable problem.

Those of us who aren't busy posing on the issue (a pose that the taxpayers general, not the posers, pay for) are perfectly humane but realise this insane uncontrolled situation with boat arrivals simply cannot continue.

James:

26 Jul 2013 1:42:29pm

I bitterly resent the underlying premise of this taudry piece. To suggest that boat deterrence is a product of white male racism is quite disgraceful. I suggest that Ms Ford go and talk to the many first generation migrants who are fully supportive of the policy of deterring boat arrivals. Their reasoning is quite clear and compelling - they came to Australia through a legal and well managed visa program. They did not seek nor did they receive handouts from the taxpayers but simply got to work and started to contribute to Australia. They are resentful of the treatment handed out to those who have not engeged Australia's migration program in a legal way but have circumvented the process and have used emotional blackmail to achieve a result.

Those who come by boat after paying hefty sums to people smugglers are eroding the integrity of our refugee process. Anyone who is suffering a genuine fear of persecution as defined by the UN Charter can apply for refugee status at any Australian embassy including our embassies in Kabul, Teheran and Colombo. Given that mobile phones have penetrated most societies an asylum seeker can enquire using an online process if they wish to be assessed for protection. I might remind readers that just because you are poor or in a war zone does not make you a refugee. Wanting to have better life does not make you a refugee. Unfortunately the low threshold applied by the government means that any asylum seeker who is effectively coached as to what responses they should make to the government official can tick enough boxes to be granted protection and permanent residence in Australia. Why bother going through the normal process when you can go through the back door?

A few pointers for the bleeding hearts - the largest group of asylum seekers arriving by boat are Iranians. They have all left Iran using genuine Iranian documents without being hindered by the government from which they are claiming protection. They then travel to Indonesia whereupon they are granted visa free entry which allows them to join up with a smuggling venture for travel to Christmas Island. Along the way they destroy their passports in order to maintain the fiction that they are "fleeing persecution" despite the fact they were issued these passports by the very government they are fleeing from.

When they receive their Australian visa a large number are then returning to Iran to gather up their families to brign them to Australia. So much for fleeing persecution.

Peter of Melbourne:

26 Jul 2013 1:43:49pm

So it is everyone elses fault that you feel guilty about being able to buy a piece of overpriced rubbish from China? If you are having guilt trips over the plight of the unwashed billions in the 3rd world then reach into your own damn pocket and donate to one of the NGO's who are forever screaming for cash.

These dysfunctional societies and their people ultimately made their own problems it is not our society's responsibility in any way at all to solve those problems or aid their people in running from their own responsibility of fixing their own messes. We can offer help and advice to aid them in fixing their societies, however as is quite clear most of them are still stuck in the 8th century and refuse to advance from that point. There is no way in hell that Australian politicians should be importing that baggage into our own society.

At the end of the day, not my problem, not my family's problem, not my country's problem. Oh and neither are pathetic little egotistic guilt trips by bleeding hearts who cannot provide real lasting solutions.

Sukebe Dayo:

26 Jul 2013 1:44:10pm

Don't come the raw prawn, Clemintine. 85% of the so called asylum seekers throw their documents overboard, most are bypassing safe countries to win the Centrelink Lottery here in Oz, most have thousands to spend with smuglers, many will want to change our laws to Sharia law, a great number will pucnh out child after child in order to stay on welfare because they get more than if they had a real hob. Yes, we should have SOME compassion but let that compassion be aimed at giving aid to improve refugee camps, educating and training refugees in preparation to be gainfully employed.

Reduce the intake to 6,000 employable refugees trained (by us overseas in camps- not here in Oz), make them serve at least two years in a rural area or an area where their is a shortage of retail or agricultural employees. Give them TPVs and have them wait 10 years in Oz before gaining citizenship.

You , Clementine, don't seem to have seen the scores of welfare bludgers that I have amongst these, mainly, ecomomic refugees driving near new cars and SUVs, not paying their school fees and having kids with three different names - WHY????-(maybe rent a kid to give another bludger more welfare) Oh! how blind you do-gooders are. Lets help those who will help themselves and stop extremist Islam from taking over this country. Yes, I have Muslim friends and like them inspite of them not allowing their kids to marry a non Muslim.

kevin o'lemon:

26 Jul 2013 1:48:12pm

(sigh) it has nothing to do with racism to want to stop the horrific deaths like we saw off Christmas Island. Please stop pretending that it does. We are increasing our intake of refugees, not decreasing it. The PNG policy is intended to deter the people smugglers and the risky boat journeys that have led to 1200 deaths since Rudd ignorantly dismantled Howard's policies, cheered on by self-styled "humanitarian" poseurs.

Mike North:

26 Jul 2013 1:49:28pm

Clemintine, I am not buying it. To quote Mal on his thoughts really is desperate, he may feel he has blood on his hands from when he was the Minister for the Army during the Vietnam conscript days, Then to later become the Defence Minister when the heat was really turned up.I dare say he has a conscience and its probably playing at him. He finds balance with this issue. I see no connection to whats happening now to be digging up the past and directing the blame at the feet of John Howard seems a little desperate. What were the drowning stats during his period as leader. I am concerned with one main issue. The boat departures are increasing by the day and at this rate we will lose controll of it if we do not act. Are the present plans by both sides poorly thought out?, I am not sure but for me its an issue thats now totally controlled by the Smugglers and they also are having problems with the numbers.I would really like to have one of those new fandangled water boilers.

Jungle Boy:

Thank you for showing how the policies of the Tweedledee and Tweedledum parties are "couched in humanitarian terms" but don't care a fig for the humans consigned to oblivion under those policies.

Thank you for exposing the hypocrisy of the "deference to authority" in those who call for "orderly" flight from persecution and yet at the same time call for Australian values. One Australian value is larrikinism: an irreverence for authority.

Circumspect Bleach:

26 Jul 2013 1:52:26pm

Clementine, you just gained a fan 101! I would even venture on to Twitter to follow you! And that is saying something. Such well said, well-rounded, well fleshed words.

I cannot begin to understand how Australia can even get away with this shirking of our duties - the one we signed up to. These refugees are seeking asylum! They are to be given the benefit of the doubt, as most people should be when escaping from conditions that are horrific. Who would bother getting onto a boat to go anywhere if the place they were residing in was not horrific? It seems so logical it is mind-boggling. Not so to the xenophobes who run this country and their blinkered acolytes who willingly tout their phobic line.

Charity begins at home. These people should be shown the same hospitality as those who are in desperate need. We don't 'own' anything; we only live on borrowed time and we borrow the air and the lifestyle till earthy clods claim us. Who says we are even an inviolable moral outlet? Our ancestors were boaters. It's time to give sanctuary to those seeking it.

Immigration is running rampant, but that doesn't seem to worry politicians, as the people who fund their parties back over-migration. It's the over-bite there that's paralysing this country, not any imprimatur of its charitable obligations.

Heretic:

Ian M:

26 Jul 2013 1:55:13pm

Clementine. All interesting points, but one simple question. How do we stop the deaths. Until that is answered then articles such as this show the lack of integrity of the authors, equal to those who demonise these people.

JB:

26 Jul 2013 1:56:22pm

You may be able to walk into a store a buy a fancy kettle but not all of us in Australia can.The issue now is turning to the fact it seems that we do not have the right to say no to anybody. Refugees no more about the law than the average Australian. They kow there a loop holes that forces us to take them. They know if they send there children alone we have to look after them. Can anyone honestly say that this is type of person that we want ? People who will send their children on a perilous journey just so they can get to the country they want to.The latest policy basically says to asylum seekers, we are increasing our intake of refugees because we care, but do not come by boat because we care.Those who do come by boat don't care, then neither should we.

BoB:

True Blue Ozzie:

Firstly most Australian's are not racist, our strong objections to these "illegal boat people" arriving like a plague on our shores has everything to do with it.

1) most Australian's object to the abuse of this UNHCR agreement.

2) these people can afford to fly to indoneas , they then pay huge amounts to people smugglers for a death boat to Australia.

3) they dump all their regal document's costing millions to the Australian tax payers, to grind out who, where and are they criminals .lr terrorists .

4) We provide food, shelter, health care, smokes, clothing the list just goes on, and in a split second there totally disrespectfull to Australian's for what they have been provided with.

5) when they believe they should be out in our community, they will destroy there tax payer funded shelters, vandalise anything in there path, sew there mouths up, threaten self harm, anything they can to try and force there release .

6) they have robber the chance of refugees who have been in refugee camps for 10 + years starving to death of ever getting a better life

No Australian's do not want these elements released into our community, it's not fitting to our Australia's expectations or standards in our communities . We don't care where they came from, its all about the reasons i have noted above.We want proper orderly immigration through our front door, that we can afford to assist these people with out sending Australia broke.The "illegal boat people" problem is not just about Rudd, there are 2 other factors in play here. The GFC Abbott said we never had, and Australia boasted around the world how great we did through the GFC and we had a judge mining boom.No wonder where drowning in a sea of "illegal boat people".

Australia must with draw from the old and very outdated UNHCR treaty as it is there is no place in modern Australia for it. We can still donate forgen aid programmes to those countries in need. Until Australia has a better and fairer system, we are really hurting our country our people, and breeding racism that will blow up in Australia in years to come.

mudlark:

26 Jul 2013 2:00:14pm

Dear Clementine,An interesting article. I do take umbrage at the tone of some of your argument however I would agree that Papua New Guinea is not a place I would choose to live and we do spend a lot of money on this issue that could be better spent elsewhere. However we cannot have an open slather so how do we manage this problem? It is a problem, we donot' live in a land of abundant resources and more than enough opportunities for all' . Indeed we seem not to be able to look after the current population. There is a crisis with aged care, hospital waiting lists, public housing waiting lists (families living in cars etc) . Again if we could redirect the money currently spent on detention centres perhaps we could solve some of these issues. But I doubt it would solve all.While Australia only has a very small percentage of the worlds refugees population (about 0.2 %) of the 110,000 refugees resettled globally in 2009 we took around 10%. The figures are from the UNCHR and also the Refugee Council. So I dispute your suggestion we do not want to share. As an individual I do want to share but I do not want to be taken advantage of either. Ignoring the legal claptrap around refugee definitions and using hopefully the reasonable person approach, someone who arrives by boat and says I'm fleeing persecution but has passed through a country or countries where they would have been accepted is to me not a refugee. The refugee to me is a person sitting in a camp in Kenya or Chad with nothing, little hope, no money and no future. That is the person I would like to think that we could open our arms to welcome to this country and then provide adequate support to once they are here.So how do we control the numbers who want to emigrate to this country. I say as a nation we have a right to dictate who gets to benefit from living here. There needs to be some form of control and so far really nothing seems to work. So may be the PNG option , despite seemingly harsh, is an option to break the cycle of refugee smuggling and maybe give some space and oppourtunity to set up something new that can work.PS I still have the same kettle I bought 20 years ago, made in Australia

Doug of Armidale:

26 Jul 2013 2:00:46pm

Being born in a country like Australia is a fortuitous accident and not reward for work well done? Australia is a magnet for others because its people have developed a tolerant, equal society with rule of law. That is no accident and most of us wish to protect that status.

Greig:

26 Jul 2013 2:01:48pm

In this article Clementine Ford has failed to mention the 1100 innocent men women and children who have died at sea, in fact the issue of people smuggling and dangerous sea journeys is entirely ignored. If 1100 Australian citizens had died at sea Australians would be outraged, and yet in Clementine's world the issue does not even rate a mention. Is it because these people are "just refugees", and have less value than white Australians? Are we seeing the Racist Politics 101 that Clementine is accusing John Howard of?

One wonders if bleeding hearts like Clementine will ever understand that by promoting policies which encourage refugees to arrive by boat, they have blood on their hands.

Bazza:

26 Jul 2013 2:03:27pm

Clementine, You need to tell us what you think is an acceptable number of refugees Australia should take each year and what area of the world they come should come from.

While I agree in principle with what you are saying I don't think we can take an unlimited number of these poor souls. What about the ones in Africa who can't get close enough to Australia to get on a boat?

For the life of me I can't figure out an answer to how we help everyone.

Daz:

26 Jul 2013 2:05:58pm

Before the chattering hordes start.

There is no crisis, no emergency, no threat to our borders. If the entire world's population of refugees were camped to our North then we (the region) would have a significant logistical issue to address. In the meantime the numbers there and those reaching Australia are well within the number of migrants we actively encourage to come. Those who come here put up their hands. Not a single military, police or immigration official has to lift a finger to find them. The financial cost to Australia is of our own making.

We do not address other dangerous behaviour like smoking, driving a car, rock climbing, by imprisonment. The response here is ludicrous.

The Pacific Solution did not stop the boats. The Siev X, for example, came during this period. As far as I am aware this is still the single largest loss of life event.

A significant number of asylum seekers fly to Australia on false documents. The chattering hordes, quite rightly, do not accuse Alan Joyce from QANTAS of people smuggling.

"We decide who comes here." This is reminiscent of the attitude towards illegitimate children. Lock them up if their parents do not have a publicly approved certificate to have sex, ie, marriage.

Heidi:

26 Jul 2013 2:07:23pm

Agree wholeheartedly. I can't comment on the racism elements of this (I don't understand it), but also lot of people seem to be against immigration on the unfounded assumption that "they're going to take our jobs! [insert hysteria here]".

There is no rational economic argument against taking in refugees. Growing our population increases our productive capacity - if you don't believe me, consider 1 person living by themselves in Australia - how big do you think the economy would be? And then 2 people, 3? At which point does an extra person become a disadvantage? If at all, that point is certainly not 23million.

The best thing is that migrants tend to be our hardest working, most entrepreneurial citizens, doing work that often we can't/don't want to, and thereby creating supply/ demand and jobs.

Let's all be just a little bit more generous, kind, and open-minded, and maybe Australia can be a true country of freedom, hard work and opportunity, and not this xenophobic, uneducated wilderness it feels like today.

glenn:

26 Jul 2013 2:08:00pm

a bit tired of the inference that i'm racist because i don't want to see australia's borders over run by goodness knows who! you really are a tiresome lot! i want border security for my country not an open door policy. the liberal, fling the borders open espoused by impractical ratbags, would lead to chaos on our borders.

David Francis:

An ignorant person in Oz:

26 Jul 2013 2:10:09pm

Clementine must be from Planet Fantasy. Her choice of the word 'cruelty' by John Howard, is hysteria. Too much pen pushing and not enough worldly experience to be able to discern between false compassion and tough love. The Asylum seekers are mostly opportunists who lie and deceive their way into decadent Australia because they know the government of Australia will give free handouts. And because there are soft-touch people to take up their deceitful cause. They, I suggest, are the ignorant ones.

mark:

26 Jul 2013 2:10:43pm

Disgusted by rudd and abbott and there cruelty to asylum seekers just to win votes. This is typical of catholics give them to much power and they do disgusting things just look at the church.Labor have lost me forever and so have the coalition.I hope there is a high court challenge against this disgusting labor party and its morally bankrupt scumbag of a leader.Australians should be ashamed of there political leaders from both sides of politics.

Miowarra:

It was only ten years ago that this whole country was within one month of not having enough potable water for its population.

There were water usage restrictions in all capital cities, some of which are still in force. There was panic building of desalination plants so that we might still have some water (damn the expense!) to drink.

This is not "a land of abundant resources" Clementine, this is a land of impoverished soils due to the great age of this continent, a land where our most productive crop areas have been overbuilt for residences, a land where the water supply is marginal at best.

We're hanging on by the skin of our teeth and another long drought (of about ten years - not unknown) might easily start to drive us over the point of no return.

albert:

26 Jul 2013 2:12:51pm

Thank you Clementine,

A beautiful, searingly clear exposition of the horrible horrible inhumanity that is being stoked daily in an ignorant, fearful, miinformed population by our shameless so-called " leaders". They have not an iota of morality or human empathy amongst them, not an iota of statesmanship. Abbott calls the desperation of these hopelessly vulnerable asylum seekers a "national emergency" Not an emergency for these helpless,terrified people but an emergency for us overfed, complacent, self-satisfied,selfish, and ignorant and self-deluded 'aussies"Deluded because we like to think rather highly of ourselves.You know".Fair go", "mateship" "decency" '" This is a period in our history where I, for the first time in my life, feel ashamed to be Australian. I suppose I am just a bleeding heart liberal.

molpol54:

26 Jul 2013 2:14:05pm

I agree with many of your comments and the theme of your article. However the real problem is 'people getting on boats to get here' - it is dangerous and costing lives. It needs to stop so that the focus can shift to really helping those fleeing violence and persecution. I think the use of detention centres is barbaric, however, had they alone deterred people getting on boats they would have served a purpose. I find Malcolm Fraser's comments and opinions wise and knowledgeable and would like to see both parties consult with people like him to solve the problem.

What I find really amazing is that so many people have no problem finding the people smugglers and boats to board, but the authorities can't find and shut them down.

I would like to see the boats stop and taxpayers' money used to productively help these people resettle, whether it is here or elsewhere.

GreyZeke:

"According to the UN?s refugee agency (UNHCR) the number of people currently in situations of displacement has hit 45 million, the highest figure for 14 years"

Does Miss Ford suggest with our total population Australia should provide refuge for all 42,000,000?

No? Then does Australia have the right to determine how many come here?

No : Hello 42 millionYes : Then there is a need to secure our borders - a need that took the ALP 6 years to figure out.

A good part of the problem are those like Miss Ford who are wet behind the ears. All clucking faux 'compassion' into their inner city lattes while gunfire is heard virtually every night in those suburbs of Sydney favoured by those who sought refuge here.

LBJ:

26 Jul 2013 2:31:43pm

Clementine,

I take offence to the comment "appeasing the ignorance of a population that has, in its refusal to show empathy for those fleeing oppressive regimes or war torn nations, ironically managed to paint itself as at risk from a destructive force". Are you and those severely left of this debate the only ones who are all knowing about such issues? Why is it because some people have an opposing view or at least some reservations that they need to be classed as ignorant or inhumane or what ever social engineers want to call it?

Can I point out where your blissful ignorance is? You quote "We live in a land of abundant resources and more than enough opportunities for all, yet so many of us behave as if we've done something to deserve this good fortune and as such have a right to dictate who gets to benefit from it". Australia is one of the driest and arad continents on earth, we cling to the fertile coasts which are filling up fast with urban sprawl. In Western Australia we can no longer rely on rainfall, more desal plants need to be constructed to keep up with population demands, farmers are constantly battling salinity. The WA Governnment recently admitted that population growth is outstripping it's ability to provide infrastructure and services.

If we open the "borders" up and let in all who travel pay to travel by boat after destroying documentation, who will provide the resources and support for them?

Finally what about those "genuine" refugees who are not privileged enough to pay money and travel by boat, deliberately saboutage the vessel and ring 000 to ensure rescue, they fester in squalid camps all over the world awaiting their turn for a better life.

There is not enough reality in this complex debate and socialist, utopian and blatantly arrogant opinions like this one don't help.

kathywho:

26 Jul 2013 2:31:58pm

Clementine,

I don't think it is as anywhere as simple as you suggest: that we are somehow ungenerous because we worry about asylum seekers.

Australia IS one of 40 countries part of the UNHCR Humanitarian Program committed to taking in a quota of refugees each year. Indeed, Australia takes in about 14,000 each year (though this number is diminished each time an asylum seeker arrives and is given protection). For example, in 2011-12 6,004 offshore refugee visas were granted (these are through the UNHCR Humanitarian program - and oh among these places are special ones for women, whoa re rightly seen as most vulnerable), while 7,755 places went to onshore arrivals (by air - mainly I think to those who already had a visa) - and those by boat. [Figures from p.89 of the Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers].

This was the FIRST time ever that asylum seekers were granted more visas than those who were part of the UNHCR program. As well, there were only 714 SHP visas (mainly family reunions). Indeed the pressure of family reunions and the expected wait for many years (increased each time more asylum seekers arrive) is doubtless one of the reasons for children being on the boats.

As well, it is not that Australia is ungenerous. Rudd has announced increasing those Humanitarian Program places for refugees to 20,000. So the proposal is to care for MORE, not less. Mind you the number of asylum seekers in the last year and a half means, perhaps, that no-one waiting in the UNHCR camps has a chance of being placed.

It is not easy. All refugees and all asylum seekers need support. But, it absolutely does not help if you claim all policies are similar. Does Abbot want to increase the Humanitarian intake if asylum seekers are stopped? Does Rudd? There's a difference that needs exploring.

J.T:

26 Jul 2013 2:35:38pm

As a libertarian I am not big on national borders so the free movement of people between countries isn?t really a huge issue for me. By default I have no problem with people seeking asylum-in fact it probably says something about how good our country is that people are willing to risk life and limb to get here. Come to think of it, our society likes to pick and choose winners and losers (think welfare and our progressive tax system), it?s not a stretch to think we could swap out some of our welfare ?lifers? with these hard working asylum seekers. It might gall some Australians to think that non Australian?s be preferenced over Australian?s, but let?s be honest, we have some pretty ordinary Australians?Think when you watch today tonight, the entitled welfare mum or dad with 20 kids who has been on disability compo, wasting my tax money despite the fact they can kick the footy at the park, put them on the boat to Indonesia for sure and bring in the hard working Iranian who will drive a cap at all hours of the night and ensure his kids a better life. Or that tawdry feminist on a boat, the one who promotes herself as an equal rights activist but refuses to see the greater point that unless all rights are applied equally, her world view will continue to promote unequal outcomes. Feminists, welfare activists, unions, business lobbies..they are all rent seekers promoting greater and greater intrusions in our lives through government regulations, tax?s or equal opportunity, all in the guise of egalitarianism.It?s a joke, bring in the asylum seekers-they come here and work hard, statistically they don?t live on welfare and they rely on each other and their community. I am all for asylum seekers in Australia- My policy, I am offering up a direct swap, Indonesia?s refugees for our welfare addicts, unequal opportunity pushers like feminists and ACOSS and any other big government advocates.

Alexich:

26 Jul 2013 2:38:56pm

Clementine here shows you what is wrong with the middle-class bleeding hearts in this country. She stares at her newly bought purring kettle with five different boiling functions, feeling bored with the appliance that doesn?t give her enough excitement and emotional fulfilment. Then she contemplates how exciting it would be to destroy all this comfort for a ?humanitarian ideal? of helping refugees. Or even to plunge herself into the world of suffering and misery and find some meaning to her life since in its opulence and comfort it is becoming meaningless.

So we gather that the ultimate battle in Australia is not so much between the refugees and Australian population, nor is it between the politicians and citizens but it is increasingly becoming a battle between Australians themselves, a ?cold civil war? between the anti-refugee citizens, and those privileged lobbies that had developed strong taste for refugee labour. I think these series of ABC forums have amply shown the evidence of a rapid and worsening split in Australian society, the evidence of a cold civil war.

She says: ?It is an entirely ostentatious appliance, but because I have the good fortune of living in a country where ostentatious appliances are the norm, I strolled into my local department store and bought it on sale nonetheless ? I think we can manage extending a hand to some of the world's most vulnerable without threatening our core values.?

She bought that kettle as if it came from Mars, not seeing what it would mean if she had to work every day on a dirty factory floor with these refugees on a production line producing such consumer items for a handful of peanuts. She talks about the ?good fortune? in living in a country like Australia, thinking that all good luck comes from angels, and not from the dirty hard work of fighting for it and defending it. She never thought of having to defend her high standard of living, or the need to defend the labour standards of Australian workers if the employers were to start having access to a mass of refugee labour prepared to accept a desperation wage. She probably never even held a production job in her life, or lived with the refugees in a public housing estate. Least of all she would remember what the brave white Australian men and women fought for during the World Wars when they marched into the battle to their deaths for the ?King and the Nation?. It is these kinds of people amongst ourselves that don?t deserve a high standard of living, who are ignorant of what it means to produce a peaceful civilised life, that we have to wage our civil war against? not the refugees!

gerard oosterman:

26 Jul 2013 3:59:08pm

Now that the armed forces might get involved I wonder if we should take a closer look at those whales that seem to get 'stranded' so often.I hope Jim Molan takes the whale off Noosa seriously too. Refugees are known to cunningly pretend to be drowning whales.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-26/whale-tangled-in-shark-net-off-noosa/4845220Do we have a spare scud or drone somewhere?